Shaman main here. I play this game to always crack the off meta code, and make sub par classes work. Oddly enough, it seems it's always Shaman at the bottom of the meta. With that said, I have ventured to other classes throughout the years and still do(Unicorn Priest, rough times of Paladin, Warlock) . I agree with you that netdecking is boring at times, but I do enjoy seeing others ideas, and creativity to further enhance my own homebrews or simply build upon what they were thinking/had in mind. Sometimes they were headed in the right direction, but overlooked a combo or interaction that could have pushed their deck further.
Everyone doesn't have the ideals as you do. Because of that, continue to be a homebrewer, but with a different purpose. Use your envy towards netdecking as fuel to demolish them with something that is off-meta. I get so much satisfaction out of beating a paladin as a shaman after they bm all game thinking they have an easy win, only to get demolished. I use the Thunder King portrait just for his emotes. It can be rewarding in other ways also when your opponent adds you as a friend only to get your deck code, and gives you a thumbs up for creating a fun, but strong deck.
Like, make a thread and ask just how many decks people think they've played over the last 2 years, I'd be stunned if anybody replied with "one". I don't actually think you genuinely believe large parts of the player base do that.
Maybe next time, post in the salt thread, that's where your op belongs. It isn't trying to get genuine discussion going, it's not an honest question, you haven't considered anybody else's pov, it's not a constructive thread. It's a tantrum and there's a thread for the people who need to tantrum already.
The main reason is because there aren't many good casual multiplayer games out there, with proper support and a huge playerbase like Hearthstone. Not too hard to figure out, to be honest.
The main reason is because there aren't many good casual multiplayer games out there, with proper support and a huge playerbase like Hearthstone. Not too hard to figure out, to be honest.
There are loads of multiplayer games you can play casually? Absolutely loads.
The main reason is because there aren't many good casual multiplayer games out there, with proper support and a huge playerbase like Hearthstone. Not too hard to figure out, to be honest.
There are loads of multiplayer games you can play casually? Absolutely loads.
I know Sherlock, but they don't have the same support (we are talking about Blizzard here) and a huge established playerbase like Hearthstone (as I said before), which gives the player much more security about the money and time invested.
Big companies always win. Why? Because bigger is better! :)
Everyone needs to understand that Blizzard printed very few tools for class such as Shaman to be at the top of the food chain. Besides, it is better to homebrew and build fun decks.
If the game was balanced, net decking wouldn't matter as much. But Blizzard doesn't know how to balance classes, for example, totally removing card draw for classes like shaman and priest, and then actually expecting you to play minion priest or murloc/elemental shaman.
If you take Magic the Gathering for example, they know that colors like Red are not as focused on card draw as say Blue and supposed to run out of steam. So what do they do? Give them worse card draw, like ones that discard 1 draw 2. But they don't eliminate card draw entirely for these classes entirely.
So many bad design choices by Blizzard leads to bad meta, and people playing the same netdecks cause they just don't like to lose. It's Blizzard"s fault not the players.
And another thread where reality has been shifted.
It's easy to see who started the insults, just read the first post. Replies come AFTER that one, not before.
I make no bones about it, I think the OP is very insult worthy, but it doesn't change the fact that he set the tone regardless of how much he denies it.
The concept of looking down on people for how they find their fun in life isn't new to Hearthstone, or the internet, or anything else. There have always been those who find some pleasure in assuming superiority in refinement. You eat burgers, I eat steak. You enjoy a NASCAR race, I own a box at the Kentucky Derby (we won't get started on the animal abuse somehow being the "refined" choice on that comparison, but whatevs).
I'm guilty of it myself, sometimes. Especially in choice of games.
I just find it funny we've now extended it to different subsets of the SAME GAME player base.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
By the way, does anyone else get that "suddenly don't get reply notifications on a thread that gets contentious" thing, or is it just me who gets unsubscribed to stuff?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
As many have noted, there's nothing to stop the OP experimenting.
In fact, it sounds like the main thing they want is more variety in the decks they play against. Which is just another form of RNG love, isn't it? (Ooh, what's going to be in this wacky deck?)
Having a settled meta makes your opponent more predictable. Good players can win with janky decks.
You've sort of gone mask off here and essentially proved my original response was appropriate. Here I was, worried I had interpreted what you'd said in "bad faith", slightly reaffirmed by others seeing it the same way, and now fully vindicated. Everybody was responding to you OP, where you came off as aggressive and imposed that your preferences were the objectively best and most fun way to play.
Your clear inability to empathize with other people's positions is made extremely obvious now, as this weird food analogy you've concocted (or cooked up, if you'd prefer) demonstrates that you have clear disdain for people who live their lives differently from you without any attempt at trying to understand why they live that way. You created a hypothetical person who acts a certain way to prove this.
If, hypothetically, I was attending the same food joint for years, here's a few reasons that could be the case: It's the only local place in my small town/area proximal to my work. That particular dish is cheap and I'm on an extremely restrictive budget. I work long hours/awkward hours and don't have the time to cook properly. The place is sentimental/otherwise meaningful to me in some way (met my hypothetical wife here/it used to be my Dad's restaurant/etc.) I have to order a particular dish because I have specific food allergies and don't want to bother the weight staff/cooks with alterations to my order. I order a particular dish because it makes me feel nostalgic/good (Ratatouille). etc.
Also, it's proven to be beneficial to one's health to eat the same food everyday, it apparently helps in losing weight. One Google search solved that one. I myself have gone on multiple month-long kicks of eating the same dinners (chicken + broccoli/baked tofu + brown rice) for a wealth of reasons I don't care to go into. If a hypothetical person were to try my cooking and tell me it was really bad, and to take lessons, I'd sure feel lousy but that wouldn't make them wrong. Maybe I did cook poorly, and of course I could stand to learn how to cook better, but whatever, I'd take their criticisms to heart and move on. I wouldn't call them any mean names or anything. Maybe overly blunt or insensitive, but some people are just like that.
Hearthstone is not a TCG. It's a CCG. You can't trade Hearthstone cards with your peers. You can collect Hearthstone cards and pretend you own them. Perhaps in a TCG deckbuilding is more meaningful because your ownership of the cards and need to purchase them necessitates building a good deck - as to maximize the productivity of the money you spent on it - but you can also netdeck in TCGs. Every TCG community (I'm a spectator of like 3 of them, with 2 CCGs on top of that) has people who believe that "netdecking is bad" for various reasons that they're entitled to. You're entitled to believe the same, though when you impose that people who netdeck are morally inferior to you or are otherwise bad, that's when you get threads like this. You can backpedal all you want, but everybody who read your OP and didn't immediately agree understood that you were projecting those things, even if you didn't say them.
Cooking and learning how to cook requires a time investment, as well as a financial one because you have to spend money to acquire ingredients and tools. Likewise, deckbuilding in the way you describe requires time investment, as well as a financial one. There are 10 classes in Hearthstone, each of which having 100's of cards by now that they can play. Packs are random and anti-consumer, making getting the things you want/need to experiment with a total crapshoot and financial sinkhole.
Ultimately your analogy falls flat because nobody is really saying that they're a better deckbuilder than you. Some are inferring from your post that you're not good at it, because salty threads like this are typically spawned when people lose to meta decks with their homebrews - which is a totally reasonable conclusion to draw. Plenty of people have been saying the reasons they netdeck, each as valid as the last. You deciding to cling to the few people saying that you're "bad" is a tell that you don't have anything to say that can actually validate your original position against all these people with rock solid reasoning to do what you said was bad.
And finally, you saying that "The funniest part is that they think that the deck builders are the snobby and rude ones, when actually it's the opposite" is ridiculous, hypocritical, and flagrant self-victimization after you literally made a post antagonizing the people you're talking about. You proposed that people who disagree with you are morons, and you said that some people who argue against your point are so dumb they couldn't deck build in the first place (unlike you, a galaxy brain king). Your OP was snobby and rude and people responded in kind, don't pretend that you're some victim just because people are reciprocating the same energy as you.
Happy, don't be surprised by the attacks. There are some blizzard defenders on this site who think the way to promote positive discussion is to attack and mock anyone who is critical of Hearthstone. Remember, when you get flak, it means you are over the target.
He's not said one thing criticizing Blizzard. Ergo, no one who disagrees with him is defending Blizzard.
You're just trying to start a fight. Grow up.
It is so fun to see all the same names attack anyone who is critical of blizzard. It is really fun to see them try to pull semantic arguments and act as if they made a valid point.
Well no, Tall Stranger is completely correct. You clearly have ‘forum enemies’ and are uncomfortable with seeing them argue against a potential ‘ally’. Hence you are forcing a point which doesn’t relate to the conversation.
The OP has grievances with the player base when he SHOULD have grievances with the developers (as you do), as ultimately it’s the games balancing that is preventing him (as a middle of the road player and deck builder at best, from what we can take from this thread) from experimenting to the extent he wishes. The playerbase are merely just playing the game as it is actually designed to be played.
Happy, don't be surprised by the attacks. There are some blizzard defenders on this site who think the way to promote positive discussion is to attack and mock anyone who is critical of Hearthstone. Remember, when you get flak, it means you are over the target.
He's not said one thing criticizing Blizzard. Ergo, no one who disagrees with him is defending Blizzard.
You're just trying to start a fight. Grow up.
It is so fun to see all the same names attack anyone who is critical of blizzard. It is really fun to see them try to pull semantic arguments and act as if they made a valid point.
Read much? He's not criticizing Blizzard. In fact, he hasn't mentioned the company once in all his posts on this thread. You're just so desperate to attack me (and those I happen to agree with) that you're trying to shoehorn your relentless "Blizzard sucks" diatribe into a completely unrelated thread.
If OP's issue is with the company, he should have complained, "Why has Blizzard created such a crappy meta that I'm stuck playing the same decks over and over?" Of course, that topic has been covered to death on the forum, but that's never stopped anyone before.
As for my "semantic arguments," do tell? Which of my points do you claim to be semantic? Though, TBH, I'm not sure why I'm asking. You haven't shown the slightest interest in doing anything but complain and engage in name-calling on this forum.
I mean, netdecking has been a thing in Hearthstone since pretty much the beginning. Maybe there's more data now and more people just hang on every word Vicious Syndicate says, but netdecking is hardly a new phenomenon.
And you can still experiment with different cards to try to beat the meta! Everybody, including Vicious Syndicate, slept on Ogremancer before somebody just realized that it would be useful in an aggressive meta dominated by cheap spells. The dominance of Evolve Shaman created the opportunity for face-freezing Control Shaman decks, which no meta report was talking about. And now all sorts of N'Zoth builds are being toyed with since the buff to 9 mana. Are they going to be good enough to beat Paladin (who is also in the middle of experimentation) and Face Hunter (who is not)? Who knows! But that's the whole point of the experimentation and deckbuilding, which OP claims he misses and which tons of players, including in the Hearthpwn community, are constantly doing.
If there is a problem right now, it's that Barrens was pretty much a flop as far as expansions go, at least for every class besides Paladin or Warrior. So we have rotation, which means the smallest card pool of the year, and an expansion that did pretty much nothing for most of the classes in the game. That's why everyone is playing the same few decks and why there seems to be such limited variety in the meta.
Happy, don't be surprised by the attacks. There are some blizzard defenders on this site who think the way to promote positive discussion is to attack and mock anyone who is critical of Hearthstone. Remember, when you get flak, it means you are over the target.
He's not said one thing criticizing Blizzard. Ergo, no one who disagrees with him is defending Blizzard.
You're just trying to start a fight. Grow up.
It is so fun to see all the same names attack anyone who is critical of blizzard. It is really fun to see them try to pull semantic arguments and act as if they made a valid point.
When somebody actually starts defending Blizzard on here we'll let you know. In the meantime, we'll be talking about what OP and other people on here were actually saying.
Shaman main here. I play this game to always crack the off meta code, and make sub par classes work. Oddly enough, it seems it's always Shaman at the bottom of the meta. With that said, I have ventured to other classes throughout the years and still do(Unicorn Priest, rough times of Paladin, Warlock) . I agree with you that netdecking is boring at times, but I do enjoy seeing others ideas, and creativity to further enhance my own homebrews or simply build upon what they were thinking/had in mind. Sometimes they were headed in the right direction, but overlooked a combo or interaction that could have pushed their deck further.
Everyone doesn't have the ideals as you do. Because of that, continue to be a homebrewer, but with a different purpose. Use your envy towards netdecking as fuel to demolish them with something that is off-meta. I get so much satisfaction out of beating a paladin as a shaman after they bm all game thinking they have an easy win, only to get demolished. I use the Thunder King portrait just for his emotes. It can be rewarding in other ways also when your opponent adds you as a friend only to get your deck code, and gives you a thumbs up for creating a fun, but strong deck.
Like, make a thread and ask just how many decks people think they've played over the last 2 years, I'd be stunned if anybody replied with "one". I don't actually think you genuinely believe large parts of the player base do that.
Maybe next time, post in the salt thread, that's where your op belongs. It isn't trying to get genuine discussion going, it's not an honest question, you haven't considered anybody else's pov, it's not a constructive thread. It's a tantrum and there's a thread for the people who need to tantrum already.
The main reason is because there aren't many good casual multiplayer games out there, with proper support and a huge playerbase like Hearthstone. Not too hard to figure out, to be honest.
There are loads of multiplayer games you can play casually? Absolutely loads.
I know Sherlock, but they don't have the same support (we are talking about Blizzard here) and a huge established playerbase like Hearthstone (as I said before), which gives the player much more security about the money and time invested.
Big companies always win. Why? Because bigger is better! :)
Thats why i play duels you make every deck you have infinite strategies ppl Will make broken stuff but if youre clever they dont stand a chance
Everyone needs to understand that Blizzard printed very few tools for class such as Shaman to be at the top of the food chain. Besides, it is better to homebrew and build fun decks.
If the game was balanced, net decking wouldn't matter as much. But Blizzard doesn't know how to balance classes, for example, totally removing card draw for classes like shaman and priest, and then actually expecting you to play minion priest or murloc/elemental shaman.
If you take Magic the Gathering for example, they know that colors like Red are not as focused on card draw as say Blue and supposed to run out of steam. So what do they do? Give them worse card draw, like ones that discard 1 draw 2. But they don't eliminate card draw entirely for these classes entirely.
So many bad design choices by Blizzard leads to bad meta, and people playing the same netdecks cause they just don't like to lose. It's Blizzard"s fault not the players.
Want to build a deck and play against other deck builders. I suggest you press the game mode button and select Arena :)
And another thread where reality has been shifted.
It's easy to see who started the insults, just read the first post. Replies come AFTER that one, not before.
I make no bones about it, I think the OP is very insult worthy, but it doesn't change the fact that he set the tone regardless of how much he denies it.
The concept of looking down on people for how they find their fun in life isn't new to Hearthstone, or the internet, or anything else. There have always been those who find some pleasure in assuming superiority in refinement. You eat burgers, I eat steak. You enjoy a NASCAR race, I own a box at the Kentucky Derby (we won't get started on the animal abuse somehow being the "refined" choice on that comparison, but whatevs).
I'm guilty of it myself, sometimes. Especially in choice of games.
I just find it funny we've now extended it to different subsets of the SAME GAME player base.
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
By the way, does anyone else get that "suddenly don't get reply notifications on a thread that gets contentious" thing, or is it just me who gets unsubscribed to stuff?
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
As many have noted, there's nothing to stop the OP experimenting.
In fact, it sounds like the main thing they want is more variety in the decks they play against. Which is just another form of RNG love, isn't it? (Ooh, what's going to be in this wacky deck?)
Having a settled meta makes your opponent more predictable. Good players can win with janky decks.
Just play Gwent or Teppen, people.
Fuck Hearthstone.
You've sort of gone mask off here and essentially proved my original response was appropriate. Here I was, worried I had interpreted what you'd said in "bad faith", slightly reaffirmed by others seeing it the same way, and now fully vindicated.
Everybody was responding to you OP, where you came off as aggressive and imposed that your preferences were the objectively best and most fun way to play.
Your clear inability to empathize with other people's positions is made extremely obvious now, as this weird food analogy you've concocted (or cooked up, if you'd prefer) demonstrates that you have clear disdain for people who live their lives differently from you without any attempt at trying to understand why they live that way. You created a hypothetical person who acts a certain way to prove this.
If, hypothetically, I was attending the same food joint for years, here's a few reasons that could be the case:
It's the only local place in my small town/area proximal to my work.
That particular dish is cheap and I'm on an extremely restrictive budget.
I work long hours/awkward hours and don't have the time to cook properly.
The place is sentimental/otherwise meaningful to me in some way (met my hypothetical wife here/it used to be my Dad's restaurant/etc.)
I have to order a particular dish because I have specific food allergies and don't want to bother the weight staff/cooks with alterations to my order.
I order a particular dish because it makes me feel nostalgic/good (Ratatouille).
etc.
Also, it's proven to be beneficial to one's health to eat the same food everyday, it apparently helps in losing weight. One Google search solved that one. I myself have gone on multiple month-long kicks of eating the same dinners (chicken + broccoli/baked tofu + brown rice) for a wealth of reasons I don't care to go into. If a hypothetical person were to try my cooking and tell me it was really bad, and to take lessons, I'd sure feel lousy but that wouldn't make them wrong. Maybe I did cook poorly, and of course I could stand to learn how to cook better, but whatever, I'd take their criticisms to heart and move on. I wouldn't call them any mean names or anything. Maybe overly blunt or insensitive, but some people are just like that.
Hearthstone is not a TCG. It's a CCG. You can't trade Hearthstone cards with your peers. You can collect Hearthstone cards and pretend you own them. Perhaps in a TCG deckbuilding is more meaningful because your ownership of the cards and need to purchase them necessitates building a good deck - as to maximize the productivity of the money you spent on it - but you can also netdeck in TCGs. Every TCG community (I'm a spectator of like 3 of them, with 2 CCGs on top of that) has people who believe that "netdecking is bad" for various reasons that they're entitled to. You're entitled to believe the same, though when you impose that people who netdeck are morally inferior to you or are otherwise bad, that's when you get threads like this. You can backpedal all you want, but everybody who read your OP and didn't immediately agree understood that you were projecting those things, even if you didn't say them.
Cooking and learning how to cook requires a time investment, as well as a financial one because you have to spend money to acquire ingredients and tools. Likewise, deckbuilding in the way you describe requires time investment, as well as a financial one. There are 10 classes in Hearthstone, each of which having 100's of cards by now that they can play. Packs are random and anti-consumer, making getting the things you want/need to experiment with a total crapshoot and financial sinkhole.
Ultimately your analogy falls flat because nobody is really saying that they're a better deckbuilder than you. Some are inferring from your post that you're not good at it, because salty threads like this are typically spawned when people lose to meta decks with their homebrews - which is a totally reasonable conclusion to draw. Plenty of people have been saying the reasons they netdeck, each as valid as the last. You deciding to cling to the few people saying that you're "bad" is a tell that you don't have anything to say that can actually validate your original position against all these people with rock solid reasoning to do what you said was bad.
And finally, you saying that "The funniest part is that they think that the deck builders are the snobby and rude ones, when actually it's the opposite" is ridiculous, hypocritical, and flagrant self-victimization after you literally made a post antagonizing the people you're talking about. You proposed that people who disagree with you are morons, and you said that some people who argue against your point are so dumb they couldn't deck build in the first place (unlike you, a galaxy brain king). Your OP was snobby and rude and people responded in kind, don't pretend that you're some victim just because people are reciprocating the same energy as you.
please don't bully my son
It is so fun to see all the same names attack anyone who is critical of blizzard. It is really fun to see them try to pull semantic arguments and act as if they made a valid point.
Well no, Tall Stranger is completely correct. You clearly have ‘forum enemies’ and are uncomfortable with seeing them argue against a potential ‘ally’. Hence you are forcing a point which doesn’t relate to the conversation.
The OP has grievances with the player base when he SHOULD have grievances with the developers (as you do), as ultimately it’s the games balancing that is preventing him (as a middle of the road player and deck builder at best, from what we can take from this thread) from experimenting to the extent he wishes. The playerbase are merely just playing the game as it is actually designed to be played.
Read much? He's not criticizing Blizzard. In fact, he hasn't mentioned the company once in all his posts on this thread. You're just so desperate to attack me (and those I happen to agree with) that you're trying to shoehorn your relentless "Blizzard sucks" diatribe into a completely unrelated thread.
If OP's issue is with the company, he should have complained, "Why has Blizzard created such a crappy meta that I'm stuck playing the same decks over and over?" Of course, that topic has been covered to death on the forum, but that's never stopped anyone before.
As for my "semantic arguments," do tell? Which of my points do you claim to be semantic? Though, TBH, I'm not sure why I'm asking. You haven't shown the slightest interest in doing anything but complain and engage in name-calling on this forum.
I mean, netdecking has been a thing in Hearthstone since pretty much the beginning. Maybe there's more data now and more people just hang on every word Vicious Syndicate says, but netdecking is hardly a new phenomenon.
And you can still experiment with different cards to try to beat the meta! Everybody, including Vicious Syndicate, slept on Ogremancer before somebody just realized that it would be useful in an aggressive meta dominated by cheap spells. The dominance of Evolve Shaman created the opportunity for face-freezing Control Shaman decks, which no meta report was talking about. And now all sorts of N'Zoth builds are being toyed with since the buff to 9 mana. Are they going to be good enough to beat Paladin (who is also in the middle of experimentation) and Face Hunter (who is not)? Who knows! But that's the whole point of the experimentation and deckbuilding, which OP claims he misses and which tons of players, including in the Hearthpwn community, are constantly doing.
If there is a problem right now, it's that Barrens was pretty much a flop as far as expansions go, at least for every class besides Paladin or Warrior. So we have rotation, which means the smallest card pool of the year, and an expansion that did pretty much nothing for most of the classes in the game. That's why everyone is playing the same few decks and why there seems to be such limited variety in the meta.
When somebody actually starts defending Blizzard on here we'll let you know. In the meantime, we'll be talking about what OP and other people on here were actually saying.
please don't bully my son
People play the game because they enjoy it.